The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

WWII a just war?

rated by 0 users
Answered (Not Verified) This post has 0 verified answers | 322 Replies | 18 Followers

Top 100 Contributor
Male
336 Posts
Points 6,185
sirmonty posted on Wed, Jan 28 2009 11:45 AM

What are the general thoughts on WWII here on Mises.org?

Were the Allies justified in fighting WWII? 

What would have happened if the US wouldn't have gotten involved in the European theatre?  Should they have?

 

I have always been interested in this time period, so I was curious what you guys thought on the issue.  Any articles or books discussing the war from a Libertarian standpoint are very welcome.

 

  • | Post Points: 170

All Replies

Top 50 Contributor
Male
687 Posts
Points 16,345

nirgrahamUK:

more square-circle nonsense.

the military dont have a 'business' they are not subject to profit and loss. hazlitt would agree.

In war, the metrics of success and failure are "live or die" not "profit or loss."

 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
4,133 Posts
Points 66,385
Moderator

in peace the metrics of success are that you have avoided war. whats your point?

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
283 Posts
Points 5,350

Jacob Bloom:

1.  I just want to see regulation in the market place done away with, taxation lowered to acceptable levels, a flat tax instituted, government spending significantly reduced, welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, affirmative action and the Federal Reserve abolished.   But I still want there to be a government and a military.

You suffer under a common illusion.

You simply cannot get what you want from government [military, police etc.] without everyone else having /getting what they want also[ e.g. welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, affirmative action, the Federal Reserve etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum].

That is the the true [although mostly unrecognized] , price of  having a government in the first place.

Governments can never be limited to doing just the things you [or anyone else] thinks they should do.

 

Top 50 Contributor
Male
687 Posts
Points 16,345

onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom:

Jacob Bloom:

1.  I just want to see regulation in the market place done away with, taxation lowered to acceptable levels, a flat tax instituted, government spending significantly reduced, welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, affirmative action and the Federal Reserve abolished.   But I still want there to be a government and a military.

You suffer under a common illusion.

You simply cannot have what you want from government [military, police etc.] without everyone else having what they want also[ e.g. welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, affirmative action, the Federal Reserve etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum].

In order for you to get what you want from government, everyone else must/will get what they want too - _that_ is the the true [although mostly unrecognized] , price of  having a government in the first place.

Governments can never be limited to doing just the things you [or anyone else] thinks they should do.

I am in total agreement with you.  I do, however, think that because socialistic measures implanted into our democratic capitalist system will fail, that ultimately the majority will demand the changes that I see as being necessary because they lead to success.  In other words, in time, I think the majority will see it my way. Or not, I don't know the future.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
283 Posts
Points 5,350

Jacob Bloom:

 

I am in total agreement with you.  I do, however, think that because socialistic measures implanted into our democratic capitalist system will fail, that ultimately the majority will demand the changes that I see as being necessary because they lead to success.  In other words, in time, I think the majority will see it my way. Or not, I don't know the future.

 

Why would you be concerned [if you are] , as to what a majority might, or might not do?

Top 150 Contributor
256 Posts
Points 3,965
kiba replied on Sat, Jun 20 2009 12:02 PM

Jacob Bloom:

nirgrahamUK:

more square-circle nonsense.

the military dont have a 'business' they are not subject to profit and loss. hazlitt would agree.

In war, the metrics of success and failure are "live or die" not "profit or loss."

 

Is avoiding war somehow not improtant?

http://libregamewiki.org - The world's only encyclopedia on free(as in freedom) gaming.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
406 Posts
Points 7,880

Jacob Bloom:

I am not a warmonger.  I just know a serious threat when I see one.

I do too. And I see that the biggest threat in this world to my loved ones, friends, and family is Israel - and the US, for that matter.

existence is elsewhere

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
2,499 Posts
Points 40,190
Moderator

Jacob Bloom:
It's relevant because Ahmadinejad actually has the means to carry out the threat.
No he doesn't!  The Iranian military isn't all that, and Israel has nukes. Iran wouldn't stand a chance. But by all means: keep making yourself look like a fool.

Jacob Bloom:
I have no reason to believe the Israelis would lie about something like that nor can I think of any reason why they would intentionally attack a US ship.
The comm intercepts put to lie the Israeli version. If you are so brainwashed as to believe Israel can never do any wrong, you're sad.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
406 Posts
Points 7,880

Jacob Bloom:

See, again, war will not go away if you dissolve the United States.  Someone else will just come over here with their tanks and their planes (all publicly financed) and kill every last used-to-be American and take the land which we were able to hold when we had a sufficient military. 

And also there are so many loaded statements in here like "conscript and murder their own subjects."  I mean...lots of people volunteer. 

And see, in a world based on private property war is not always a losing game.  Let's imagine a scenario where you have the Region of Juan (formerly known as Connecticut) and I'm still part of maybe what's left of the US.  Now, you've got a good bit of land and some resources or whatever.  We want to take them from you.  So, we tax the people still living in the Former Republic of the US, build an army and go over and take your land.  You put up a good fight, but you just weren't able to afford enough mercenaries to keep us at bay.  Now you've lost everything.  This is a sad day for the former Region of Juan.

Jacob, for someone who likes military stuff, you're really ill-informed on modern tactics and strategy. Maybe in an alternate universe... back in the 40's... But the form of warfare and "command and conquer" style governance you reference is simply over. It just is. 

 

existence is elsewhere

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
2,499 Posts
Points 40,190
Moderator

Jacob Bloom:
See, again, war will not go away if you dissolve the United States.  Someone else will just come over here
Proof, please. And no: your Hobbesian protestations don't count.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
2,499 Posts
Points 40,190
Moderator

Jacob Bloom:
The market and the military are two totally different things that are not governed by the same forces at all.
Yes, they are. Human action has certain "laws". And those "laws" hold for all humans and all actions. Period.

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
406 Posts
Points 7,880

Knight_of_BAAWA:

Jacob Bloom:
It's relevant because Ahmadinejad actually has the means to carry out the threat.
No he doesn't!  The Iranian military isn't all that, and Israel has nukes. Iran wouldn't stand a chance. But by all means: keep making yourself look like a fool.

Jacob Bloom:
I have no reason to believe the Israelis would lie about something like that nor can I think of any reason why they would intentionally attack a US ship.
The comm intercepts put to lie the Israeli version. If you are so brainwashed as to believe Israel can never do any wrong, you're sad.

Please, Knight_of_BAAWA, this isn't helping. Calling someone a fool when they are just misinformed doesn't convince. I know, I tried it for a long time.

 

Jacob, what Knight_of_BAAWA is referring to is documented fact.

 

Iran does not currently, nor do they seem to be, able to create any type of nuclear weapon with the bit of uranium they can enrich. Besides that, the Persians have every right to nuclear weapons, at least as much right as the Israelis do - probably more.

existence is elsewhere

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
4,133 Posts
Points 66,385
Moderator

Wilmot of Rochester:
Besides that, the Persians have every right to nuclear weapons, at least as much right as the Israelis do - probably more.

which is none.

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
5,196 Posts
Points 88,450
Juan replied on Sat, Jun 20 2009 3:12 PM
Jacob Bloom:
Juan:
In a world based on private property war is a losing game, but in the kind of communist world that Jacob supports, public war makes sense (to statists of course).
And see, in a world based on private property war is not always a losing game. Let's imagine a scenario where you have the Region of Juan (formerly known as Connecticut) and I'm still part of maybe what's left of the US. Now, you've got a good bit of land and some resources or whatever. We want to take them from you. So, we tax the people still living in the Former Republic of the US, build an army and go over and take your land.
You completely failed to understand what I said and just made my point for me, again.

What I'm saying is that it doesn't make sense for private owners, i.e. normal people, to fight each other.

Of course, a bunch of militaristic commies like you, who believe in 'their country', will steal and murder when they feel like.

The question is of course whether human beings will act like rational beings, or will act like nationalist beasts.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
687 Posts
Points 16,345

Knight_of_BAAWA:

Jacob Bloom:
The market and the military are two totally different things that are not governed by the same forces at all.
Yes, they are. Human action has certain "laws". And those "laws" hold for all humans and all actions. Period.

So what happens if someone breaks those laws?  Who's going to enforce them?  Not the military I assume, right?

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Page 15 of 22 (323 items) « First ... < Previous 13 14 15 16 17 Next > ... Last » | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap